Seems that they aren't saying he's a fraud just that he overhyped his claims on accuracy and cost (he is 15) and for obvious reasons there is a lot to still figure out with his early tests and results being like step 2 of 20 to make an actual human viable test. They also point out other research has shown the protein he is claiming is maybe a weak link to cancer, not the strong one he suggests. But even the articles I read say that is not yet scientific fact either.
I don't begrudge a 15 year old getting too far out in front of his skis, he's learning. The fact he comes from a science based family make sense too, as almost all these types of situations there has to be some base understanding from a good friend or family member.
The main reason I like the snopes article more than the one you linked is snopes stayed more on the topic and didn't seem to be trying to pick the kid apart, there is no reason to do that.
Yeah right. So just "googling" means that the kid is a some kind of false prophet right? And pointing to an article that outlines if he didn't submit to a journal his findings nothing happens. How many times there were scandals in the so called "respected journals" for falsifying results and studies? Why don't you go and invent something like his invention, win a science prize and i will give you a hats off for this.
More info: https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2014/01/03/the-jack-andr...